Plus, what about the other folks like Einstein and Werner von Braun who were already hot shots when they immigrated here? It must be possible to come up with a reasonable compromise where they have to come under the normal process unless they really are filling a position which would otherwise go unfilled.
People like Einstein and von Braun would be covered under the O-1 visa today; that's the hotshot visa nowadays. I don't know if Linus Torvalds came in under that, but if he couldn't have the program is broken. The H-1B is supposed to be for skilled workers (not to the Einstein level), but IMO is used mostly for semi-indentured cheap code monkeys with phony credentials.
If I had a choice between 1 Sievert of gamma radiation given externally or 10 milliSieverts of an internal dose of Iodine 131 (8 day half life) or Polonium 210 (138 day half-life) I would take the external dose.
You'd be better off taking the I-131. Best I can tell, radioiodine doses (in the medical sense) range roughly from 1GBq to 10GBq. Dose (in the radiological sense) equivalent in Sieverts/Becqueral is 2.2 x 10^-8 for adult ingestion of I-131. Thus you're talking about 2.2 to 22 Sieverts (44 to 440 Grays) for radiation treatment of the thyroid. 10 milliSieverts of I-131 delivered internally is possibly going to give the victim thyroid cancer later (for which, ironically, they will likely take a much higher does of I-131). While not lethal, 1 Sv of gamma delivered externally is going to make the victim sick and increase their chance of all sorts of cancers.
In your case, since your thyroid is already destroyed, the radioiodine is just going to be eliminated, slightly raising your cancer risk.
It is slightly disingenius to suggest there is no evidence for the linear no-threshold model. All the epidemiological data at higher doses supports it.
That statement is more than slightly disingenuous. Data a higher doses than a proposed threshold has no power to distinguish between a linear no-threshold model and a model linear above that threshold. Thus it is not evidence for either one over the other.
No. It is not a good way to do that. It would have been if it had included measures like "Ten minutes next to the reactor core of Fukushima after partial meltdown"
Ten minutes "next to" any reactor core will kill you. Well, maybe not a never-operated one; I don't know how long it takes for nasty fission-decay products to build up.
You know what? I'd have actually loved for the reactor never to scram, and to go into a LOCA and meltdown while critical. All of the shit would be probably half a mile underground by now
No, it wouldn't. What you've described would result in a Chernobyl without the graphite. The core would have become slag long before it got half a mile underground, and on the way to its resting place it would have started more fires and spewed far more radioactive substances into the atmosphere than actually is happening.
The assumption you seem to be making, that Iraq=Libya and Hussein=Gaddafi, is so absurd on the face of it that I really see no reason I should have to refute it. If you want to make the argument that they're somehow equivalent, go ahead, but you're the one who's going to have to bring some more facts to the table.
Hmm. Iraq: Oil rich middle eastern country. Libya: Oil rich middle eastern country. Hussein: Ruthless dictator of oil rich middle eastern country. Gaddaffi: Ruthless dictator of oil rich middle eastern country. Hussein: Kills civilians without a thought. Gaddaffi: Ditto. Gaddaffi: Name difficult to spell Hussein: Name easy to spell.. there's a difference. Gaddaffi: Flamboyantly insane. Hussein: Less flamboyantly insane... hey, two differences.
As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks.
Simple conditioning can "cure" someone from liking steaks. Put something in the steaks which causes them to become violently ill after eating it, pretty soon he'll find steaks disgusting.
You could probably condition someone out of their sexuality that way, but not in any ethical way, and the side effects would likely be pretty bad. I can't see how you could condition someone IN to a sexuality, although maybe you could come up with a regimen involving direct stimulation of the pleasure center.
I hear those argument all the time - I don't buy it. Your position has been used as an unfortunate justification to continue escalating this war on freedom. If people would just let the market work, it will.
The people who are escalating the war on freedom and not letting the market work are not those holding my position. They are the music and movie industry people and their pet legislators who are making these laws. If tomorrow, everyone who cared about these issues stopped buying anything from those companies, and stopped copying their products as well, all that would change is they'd use the slight dip in sales to bolster their arguments about piracy
I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied.
Learn to swim.
To where? Swimming to Long Island likely doesn't help. Swimming the Hudson is difficult in the summer and impossible in the winter unless you're both a strong swimmer and have a wetsuit or drysuit. That leaves the Harlem river; a good choice in that it gets you to mainland NY. But first you have to get there, and that's going to be a long and difficult walk from the lower end of the island after a disaster.
I work in Manhattan. Realistically, if a major disaster (as opposed to a localized one like 9/11, or a major inconvenience like the various blackouts) hits while I'm there, I'm gonna die. Either immediately from the floodwaters, buildings falling down in the earthquake, overpressure/heat/gamma radiation from the nuclear blast, etc, or from delayed effects like fallout or a later collapse, or from starvation or disease or murder as the largely isolated island (assuming all tunnels impassible and all bridges destroyed) turns to cannibalism.
Someone's going to chime in and say that the naysayers are oversimplifying or denigrating this because they didn't think of it, but I think the quote below says enough.
"I believe this is the first time someone has taken an integrated circuit and said, 'Let's get rid of the part that we don't need,'" said principal investigator Krishna Palem, a Professor of Computing at Rice.
But that's a distraction; if you only used Iraq because Korea was too long ago, does that mean you agree intervention in Korea was wrong? That the West should have let Kim Il Sung rule the whole place, and dismissed his actions domestically as mere cultural differences?
BS. The one true freedom that people fail to realize, and fail to use, is the freedom to say "no," as in, "Thanks for the crappy stuff you continually produce, but no - keep it. And I'll keep my money."
Inconveniences you and causes them no significant harm. In fact, as we know, the xxAAs use any sales drop as evidence of piracy and thus reason for passing more oppressive laws. Doesn't matter how much of their stuff I fail to buy or pirate, I'm still subject to the laws.
Your right, the west should be quick to judge the foreign cultures we have little personal experience of and take the moral high ground;
Looks like the cultural relativists are out in force today.
After all acts like the crippling economic sanctions imposed on Iraq by the UN after bombing their country into the stone age only caused an estimated million civilian casualties of which an estimated 500,000+ were children.
Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. Why do you keep focusing on such a small conflict? For starters, let's consider Korea instead. Two and a half million civilian casualties (on both sides) according to South Korea. But of course that's also a small conflict by 20th century standards; WWII, on the order of 50 million civilian deaths (including those due to the US nuking two cities in Japan), almost none of them American. If you really want to condemn "the West", forget about Iraq.
I wouldn't be so sure. The porn sites, from what I've heard, want to be in a.xxx domain so that they can be blocked more easily. Why? Because that gives them protection against future bills like COPA that would be much more burdensome for them.
That would be exceptionally foolish. Because a future step is for ISPs to block.xxx by default, requiring users to explicitly opt-in to have access to it. And that would be death for any site on the domain.
I don't know who the dumbass who first came up with 'czar' is, but I'd sure like to kick his ass.
In its modern sense, that would be either Gaius Julius or Gaius Octavius Thurinus (later Augustus). And they've been dead for a while, but either one could have kicked your ass 6 ways from Sunday.
You're not alone. Question is, what are you going to do about it? Bend over and take it or fight it tooth and nail? Now is the time to choose, while you still can.
If you fight it tooth and nail, you'll just break your teeth and wear out your nails. The age of freedom is over; it has neither champion nor significant constituency.
My parents in Virginia have very bad 60Hz power, they have a few clocks that are often off by 10 minutes or more each way, so it's not a good idea to base your clock frequency source on the power line in the first place.
It's extremely unlikely your parents have power which is not 60Hz within very close tolerances, unless they're literally off the grid.
Slashdot Mirror
People like Einstein and von Braun would be covered under the O-1 visa today; that's the hotshot visa nowadays. I don't know if Linus Torvalds came in under that, but if he couldn't have the program is broken. The H-1B is supposed to be for skilled workers (not to the Einstein level), but IMO is used mostly for semi-indentured cheap code monkeys with phony credentials.
You'd be better off taking the I-131. Best I can tell, radioiodine doses (in the medical sense) range roughly from 1GBq to 10GBq. Dose (in the radiological sense) equivalent in Sieverts/Becqueral is 2.2 x 10^-8 for adult ingestion of I-131. Thus you're talking about 2.2 to 22 Sieverts (44 to 440 Grays) for radiation treatment of the thyroid. 10 milliSieverts of I-131 delivered internally is possibly going to give the victim thyroid cancer later (for which, ironically, they will likely take a much higher does of I-131). While not lethal, 1 Sv of gamma delivered externally is going to make the victim sick and increase their chance of all sorts of cancers.
In your case, since your thyroid is already destroyed, the radioiodine is just going to be eliminated, slightly raising your cancer risk.
And you're the one throwing out the "elitist" accusations?
That statement is more than slightly disingenuous. Data a higher doses than a proposed threshold has no power to distinguish between a linear no-threshold model and a model linear above that threshold. Thus it is not evidence for either one over the other.
Ten minutes "next to" any reactor core will kill you. Well, maybe not a never-operated one; I don't know how long it takes for nasty fission-decay products to build up.
There's been recent news articles about that very problem. I wonder why you haven't seen them???
Macbook Pro 17": 6.6 pounds ASUS G Series G73SW: 8.48 pounds.
For shielding of radioactive sources, perhaps. Not for contamination of air and water, where alpha emitters are of concern.
Two.
No, it wouldn't. What you've described would result in a Chernobyl without the graphite. The core would have become slag long before it got half a mile underground, and on the way to its resting place it would have started more fires and spewed far more radioactive substances into the atmosphere than actually is happening.
Hmm. Iraq: Oil rich middle eastern country. Libya: Oil rich middle eastern country. Hussein: Ruthless dictator of oil rich middle eastern country. Gaddaffi: Ruthless dictator of oil rich middle eastern country. Hussein: Kills civilians without a thought. Gaddaffi: Ditto. Gaddaffi: Name difficult to spell Hussein: Name easy to spell.. there's a difference. Gaddaffi: Flamboyantly insane. Hussein: Less flamboyantly insane... hey, two differences.
Simple conditioning can "cure" someone from liking steaks. Put something in the steaks which causes them to become violently ill after eating it, pretty soon he'll find steaks disgusting.
You could probably condition someone out of their sexuality that way, but not in any ethical way, and the side effects would likely be pretty bad. I can't see how you could condition someone IN to a sexuality, although maybe you could come up with a regimen involving direct stimulation of the pleasure center.
Why "in lieu of"? Shouldn't take any longer than halftime.
The people who are escalating the war on freedom and not letting the market work are not those holding my position. They are the music and movie industry people and their pet legislators who are making these laws. If tomorrow, everyone who cared about these issues stopped buying anything from those companies, and stopped copying their products as well, all that would change is they'd use the slight dip in sales to bolster their arguments about piracy
To where? Swimming to Long Island likely doesn't help. Swimming the Hudson is difficult in the summer and impossible in the winter unless you're both a strong swimmer and have a wetsuit or drysuit. That leaves the Harlem river; a good choice in that it gets you to mainland NY. But first you have to get there, and that's going to be a long and difficult walk from the lower end of the island after a disaster.
I work in Manhattan. Realistically, if a major disaster (as opposed to a localized one like 9/11, or a major inconvenience like the various blackouts) hits while I'm there, I'm gonna die. Either immediately from the floodwaters, buildings falling down in the earthquake, overpressure/heat/gamma radiation from the nuclear blast, etc, or from delayed effects like fallout or a later collapse, or from starvation or disease or murder as the largely isolated island (assuming all tunnels impassible and all bridges destroyed) turns to cannibalism.
Someone's going to chime in and say that the naysayers are oversimplifying or denigrating this because they didn't think of it, but I think the quote below says enough.
Uh, no, Professor, I don't believe it is.
When hypocrisy consists of advocating good despite having done evil, it's better than the relativism of refusing to admit the existence of evil.
That would be George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, and José MarÃa Aznar?
But that's a distraction; if you only used Iraq because Korea was too long ago, does that mean you agree intervention in Korea was wrong? That the West should have let Kim Il Sung rule the whole place, and dismissed his actions domestically as mere cultural differences?
Inconveniences you and causes them no significant harm. In fact, as we know, the xxAAs use any sales drop as evidence of piracy and thus reason for passing more oppressive laws. Doesn't matter how much of their stuff I fail to buy or pirate, I'm still subject to the laws.
Looks like the cultural relativists are out in force today.
Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. Why do you keep focusing on such a small conflict? For starters, let's consider Korea instead. Two and a half million civilian casualties (on both sides) according to South Korea. But of course that's also a small conflict by 20th century standards; WWII, on the order of 50 million civilian deaths (including those due to the US nuking two cities in Japan), almost none of them American. If you really want to condemn "the West", forget about Iraq.
Indefinitely. Worse conditions have been the lot of most of the human race for most of history. Sixty-year-old North Korea is far worse.
That would be exceptionally foolish. Because a future step is for ISPs to block .xxx by default, requiring users to explicitly opt-in to have access to it. And that would be death for any site on the domain.
In its modern sense, that would be either Gaius Julius or Gaius Octavius Thurinus (later Augustus). And they've been dead for a while, but either one could have kicked your ass 6 ways from Sunday.
If you fight it tooth and nail, you'll just break your teeth and wear out your nails. The age of freedom is over; it has neither champion nor significant constituency.
It's extremely unlikely your parents have power which is not 60Hz within very close tolerances, unless they're literally off the grid.